Gardner-Webb vs. Ohio: Final Score & Recap

ReplayCommandBoxAnalyticsMatchup

Gardner-Webb0-1

0035

Ohio1-2

▸0052

Final

Peden Stadium

	1	2	3	4	T
GARD	14	7	0	14	35
OHIO	3	28	7	14	52

GARDTeam statsOHIO

480Total yards608

289Pass290

191Rush318

16First downs33

2-133rd down5-9

1Turnovers0

26:01Possession33:59

Scoring plays

• Q4 4:00OHIODuncan Brune 1 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)35–52
• Q4 7:48GARDQuasean Holmes 5 Yd Run (Charlie Viorel Kick)35–45
• Q4 11:25OHIOSieh Bangura 32 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)28–45
• Q4 14:06GARDChris Lofton 42 Yd pass from Nate Hampton (Charlie Viorel Kick)28–38
• Q3 1:54OHIODuncan Brune 1 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)21–38
• Q2 0:28OHIOSieh Bangura 1 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)21–31
• Q2 5:01OHIOChase Hendricks 43 Yd pass from Parker Navarro (Brack Peacock Kick)21–24
• Q2 6:30GARDQuasean Holmes 68 Yd pass from Nate Hampton (Charlie Viorel Kick)21–17
• Q2 7:55OHIOSieh Bangura 8 Yd Run (Mason Williams Pass to Parker Navarro for Two-Point Conversion)14–17
• Q2 12:59OHIODuncan Brune 2 Yd Run (Brack Peacock PAT failed)14–9
• Q1 1:20GARDCarson Gresock 48 Yd Run (Charlie Viorel Kick)14–3
• Q1 3:24OHIOBrack Peacock 31 Yd Field Goal 7–3
• Q1 6:31GARDQuasean Holmes 8 Yd Run (Charlie Viorel Kick)7–0

How the model called it

Market line

OHIO −30

Against the number

GARD covered

line OHIO −30

What the numbers say

• GARD lived on explosives rather than sustaining drives — a profile that vanished once those chunk plays were tackled. 14% explosive on a 38% success rate

Win probability

ours solid · ESPN dashed

OHIO 100%50%GARD 100%

Kickoff149 plays →Final

Tap or hover on the chart to see play details

OHIO (top)GARD (bottom)· colored dots = scoresFinal: OHIO 100%

How the line closed

model vs market

Closing line

OHIO −30

Closing total

55.0

Model line

—

Actual result

GARD 35 – 52 OHIO

Leaders

Gardner-Webb

• PassNate Hampton 19/28, 289 YDS, 2 TD, 1 INT
• RushCarson Gresock 7 CAR, 70 YDS, 1 TD
• RecAnthony Lowe 8 REC, 72 YDS

Ohio

• PassParker Navarro 18/27, 290 YDS, 1 TD
• RushSieh Bangura 18 CAR, 123 YDS, 3 TD
• RecChase Hendricks 8 REC, 144 YDS, 1 TD

Tempo

what this pace leaves on the clock

26.1sper snap · slower the national 24.5s

fastnational avgslow

Snaps run

138

Points / snap

0.63

This exact spot, historically

empirical, no ratings

OHIO up 17 entering the 4th quarter. Across 841 historically comparable game states (within ±2 pts and ±3 min, from 3,056 games):

97%

OHIO went on to win

A near-lock historically

Most comparable games

WKansas vs Missouri State48-17WOhio State vs Indiana23-3WStanford vs Hawai'i37-24WSouth Carolina vs North Carolina31-17WPenn State vs West Virginia38-15

Fourth downs

16 calls

GARD gave up 0.1 points to the model on fourth down.GARD 10/11 · OHIO 4/4 agreed

FAQ

What was the final score of Gardner-Webb vs. Ohio?

Gardner-Webb 35, Ohio 52.

Did Gridpex's model pick hit?

Yes — the model's pick (OHIO) was correct.

Situational splits

what the averages hide

GARD

OHIO

38%

Success rate

57%

0.51

EPA / pass

0.48

0.26

EPA / rush

0.44

37%

Early-down success

59%

44%

Pass success

57%

32%

Rush success

58%

14%

Explosive play rate (15+ yds)

23%

13%

Stuffed rush rate

9%

51%

Pass rate

40%

5.8

Avg 3rd-down distance

6.0

GARD

5.8 yards to go on 3rd down

63 scrimmage snaps

OHIO

6.0 yards to go on 3rd down

75 scrimmage snaps

Team stats

the basics, from ESPN

GARD		OHIO
480	Total yards	608
289	Passing yards	290
191	Rushing yards	318
16	First downs	33
2-13	3rd down	5-9
5-5	4th down	0-1
19/30	Comp/Att	18/27
9.6	Yards per pass	10.7
6.2	Yards per rush	6.6
1	Turnovers	0
4-31	Penalties	4-35
26:01	Possession	33:59

Fourth downs

16 calls

GARD

10/11 with the model

−0.1 pts · −0.0% win prob

OHIO

4/4 with the model

nothing given up

Costliest call

Q1 15:00 GARD go for it on 4th & 4 at GARD 31. The model preferred punt, a gap of 0.11 points.

Every call, priced (16)

Drive chart

every possession, start to finish

GARD 5/12 scoring drives← own end zone →OHIO 8/12 scoring drives

GARDINT6 pl, 57 yds· own 25Q1

OHIOPUNT3 pl, 2 yds· own 12Q1

GARDTD9 pl, 37 yds· opp 37Q1

OHIOFG7 pl, 26 yds· opp 40Q1

GARDTD5 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q1

OHIOTD8 pl, 58 yds· own 42Q1

GARDPUNT3 pl, 5 yds· own 23Q2

OHIOTD7 pl, 69 yds· own 31Q2

GARDTD3 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q2

OHIOTD5 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q2

GARDPUNT5 pl, 29 yds· own 25Q2

OHIOTD8 pl, 80 yds· own 20Q2

GARDMISS5 pl, 39 yds· own 25Q2

OHIODOWNS7 pl, 34 yds· own 25Q3

GARDPUNT3 pl, 1 yds· own 42Q3

OHIOPUNT10 pl, 30 yds· own 15Q3

GARDPUNT3 pl, 3 yds· own 11Q3

OHIOTD5 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q3

GARDTD10 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q3

OHIOTD5 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q4

GARDTD7 pl, 75 yds· own 25Q4

OHIOTD6 pl, 45 yds· opp 45Q4

GARDPUNT3 pl, 4 yds· own 19Q4

OHIOEND5 pl, 35 yds· own 35Q4

Scoring plays

• Q4 4:00OHIODuncan Brune 1 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)35–52
• Q4 7:48GARDQuasean Holmes 5 Yd Run (Charlie Viorel Kick)35–45
• Q4 11:25OHIOSieh Bangura 32 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)28–45
• Q4 14:06GARDChris Lofton 42 Yd pass from Nate Hampton (Charlie Viorel Kick)28–38
• Q3 1:54OHIODuncan Brune 1 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)21–38
• Q2 0:28OHIOSieh Bangura 1 Yd Run (Brack Peacock Kick)21–31
• Q2 5:01OHIOChase Hendricks 43 Yd pass from Parker Navarro (Brack Peacock Kick)21–24
• Q2 6:30GARDQuasean Holmes 68 Yd pass from Nate Hampton (Charlie Viorel Kick)21–17
• Q2 7:55OHIOSieh Bangura 8 Yd Run (Mason Williams Pass to Parker Navarro for Two-Point Conversion)14–17
• Q2 12:59OHIODuncan Brune 2 Yd Run (Brack Peacock PAT failed)14–9
• Q1 1:20GARDCarson Gresock 48 Yd Run (Charlie Viorel Kick)14–3
• Q1 3:24OHIOBrack Peacock 31 Yd Field Goal 7–3
• Q1 6:31GARDQuasean Holmes 8 Yd Run (Charlie Viorel Kick)7–0

Model prediction

how the number is built

One or both teams lack a power rating (often an FCS opponent), so the model prediction is low-confidence for this game.

Where this number comes from. Every projection on this page is produced by the same model, run before kickoff on opponent-adjusted efficiency, power ratings and situational data — walk-forward validated on eleven seasons and never adjusted after the fact. How the model works →